2022 animal model of COVID-19 damage to the central nervous system of higher mammals

a reply to: spacedoubt -- many of the replies in this thread so far ask about the different severity of COVID-19 in infected persons. On #MedTwitter the infectious disease physicians started out talking about a relationship between severity of disease and the magnitude of the viral dose. Nothing further is known pro or con on that possibility so far, but the recent FDA emergency approval of a breath testing device (you breathe into a tube) suggests the possibility that such a device could provide a gold standard for degree (magnitude) of infection. Time will tell.

True, as you say, SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses both mutate, but both are RNA viruses as well, which are known to mutate "all the time," per Dr. Fauci. On the other hand, the influenza virus family has been studied for some decades (probably because of the 1918 influenza pandemic), so it is now fairly well understood. Most unfortunately, the coronavirus family has not been studied much at all, due to past funding constraints. So it is *really* hard for anyone to make many predictive statements about the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus.

You state, "those who lost smell and taste, may have some permanent brain damage." This one animal model (linked at the top of this thread) does find damage in numerous parts of the central nervous system (CNS), meaning beyond just the brain proper. So studies of total CNS damage after COVID-19 infection might do well to look throughout the CNS, and not limit themselves to literally just the brain. This journal article takes quite a bit of time to read ... I read it in printout form, taking note of key words like apoptosis, that I have not yet seen in any other studies of COVID-19. The literal meaning of apoptosis is "programmed cell death," so in these monkeys, the (irreversible) apoptosis mechanism began after a certain amount of cell damage had occurred. Further studies will have to check on whether it is possible to replace some of those destroyed CNS cells.

originally posted by: DaCook

originally posted by: bladerunner44

originally posted by: DaCook
I sure wish some of the anti-vac, pro natural immunity crowd would actually read some real science plus the referenced article below the study that tells ya getting the virus is one hell of a poor way to think you have immunity. Another issue grossly overlooked is long-term Covid which mainly attacks younger people. Some people may never get over certain effects of being infected. Never!

Denny - second booster n having fun

Hey da kook I am am anti vax and have read much of the science around natural immunity. You must be a disinfo bot, because there are a number of studies from respected sources that clearly show natural immunity is long lasting and superior to the clot shot in conferring protection. How about reading the science here:
www.israelnationalnews.com...
And here:
www.medscape.com...
or here:
www.westernjournal.com...
I could go on but it's obvious you don't have a clue.

Hey troll….. ever hear of meta analysis? Wait for it, my turn now.

Denny

Hey Da Kook, this is a very curious response. I do in fact know what a meta analysis is. I have reviewed several on the aggregation of covid related studies(Ivermectin, Long Covid, etc). WTF is your point.

a reply to: spacedoubt

Well I'd be happy to meet you at the next ats meetup then you will have met one in real life.
( No worries. I don't believe you either when you said the "vaccines" were never meant to keep a person from getting covid. Plenty of evidence to the contrary, including transcripts from our dear US president's speeches).

a reply to: Uphill

Thank you for a very informative article. But before I get into that, let me state my position on the vaccine:

It is not a vaccine using the same definition as was used in previous years. I was vaccinated for a great many diseases when I was younger: polio, measles, smallpox, etc. I never got any of them. I had myself vaccinated against tetanus (was in a high-risk situation for it) after I was grown; I never caught tetanus.

In addition, I have never been one to trust new technology until it has established some sort of track record. So a new vaccine is not going to get on my to-do list until it has been tried by others who are amenable to testing new tech. Now, with governments trying to mandate a vaccine that cannot fit the definition of a vaccine without said definition being changed, no, I will not get it. As a matter of fact I had previously considered getting the shingles vaccine; now my faith in the medical profession is so low I have decided to forego it as well.

You can consider that philosophy arrogant, uninformed, paranoid, whatever you like. I will stand by that philosophy. If the government has to force me to do something, I probably shouldn't do it.

Now, on to your article. I found this section illuminating:

The team of researchers found severe brain inflammation and injury consistent with reduced blood flow or oxygen to the brain, including neuron damage and death. They also found small bleeds in the brain.

We know that the virus (as well as the vaccine) tends to lead to inflammation - the spike protein uses the ACE2 receptor to enter the cells, which changes the ratio of ACE1 to ACE2 receptors and signals the body to produce inflammation. Many of the early deaths were from pneumonia after the virus had run its course, which we now know was caused by this mechanism. We know that both the virus and the vaccine, when in the blood supply, tend to create clotting issues. We know that the virus also produces a protein during replication that can replace the iron in hemoglobin and render it useless for oxygen transport.

What I did not see in this study was how the primates were infected. Was it via an airborne virus exchange? That seems unlikely at first glance, since it specifies that many of those severely affected neurologically escaped severe respiratory distress. I would expect a virus that transmits through respiration to cause initial damage in the respiratory areas.

It is possible that these primates were infected intentionally, which could have used injection of the virus. In that case, severe respiratory distress would not be a conduit to the bloodstream; the virus would already be in the blood stream. In that case, the results would be consistent with what we have seen already in humans, with the one caveat being the potentially undiagnosed neurological effects.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Uphill

The science also show a 98% survival rate.
No, the current "vaccines" are NOT the solution:
1- The spike proteins are responsible for much of the disease's symptoms, such as clotting
2- Getting your own body to produce those very same spike proteins as part of a "vaccine" is therefore suicidal
3- Idiotic measures like cloth masks are entirely useless
4- Lockdowns make everything worse, ex: direct cause of supply chain issues, printing too much money by government, inflation, etc

This is mass hysteria

originally posted by: TheRedneck
We know that both the virus and the vaccine, when in the blood supply, tend to create clotting issues.

I seems the blood clotting is limited to the J&J shots, and not the mRNA ones.

The strange clotting problem has caused nine confirmed deaths after J&J vaccinations — while the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines don’t come with that risk and also appear more effective, advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.

a reply to: Xtrozero

My understanding is that all of the vaccines, both traditional and mRNA, caused some clotting issues.

TheRedneck

a reply to: DaCook

'second booster'

Does that mean you have been injected with this experimental rna shot 4 times?

a reply to: TheRedneck -- Thanks for examining that journal article. Now that you mention it, I remember seeing the comment in that article about someone (the principal investigator?) infecting the monkeys with COVID-19. I assume it was via injection, because then at least you know the exposure to that infection was uniform, perhaps even constituting the "independent variable" in that experiment. That also tells you the timing of the beginning of that infection in the monkeys. If they put the monkeys in a room with a sick monkey, that would tell you about the exposure timing, but different monkeys might still have otherwise gotten a different "dose" somehow, because airborne COVID-19 is hard to track with precision.


In real life, however, there's a lot of guesswork in any infectious disease evaluation of humans who are newly diagnosed with COVID-19. People don't always know where/when they got sick, etc.

I support your assumption that an injection of SARS-CoV-2-contaminated liquid was given to the monkeys. I didn't remember to check thru the article for which virus variant was injected ... presumably omicron? Anyway, tracking the activity of this virus in the monkeys' central nervous systems (CNS) was the goal of this study. Since 2020, the universality of lung damage in humans ill with COVID-19 has been a given. I don't even remember mention of the animals' lungs in that article, so there you go. With this animal model of COVID-19 infection now in place, a far more complete sequence of CNS transmission is revealed. Before this study was published, all the international medical community had to go on for CNS effects of COVID-19 was 19 MRI scans from the UK where an average of five damaged areas in peoples' brains were observed. While dramatic, that data was just too isolated for many conclusions to be drawn.

a reply to: Uphill -- forTheRedneck, from the Introduction section of that journal article, here's a quote on how the researchers infected the animals in the experimental group with COVID-19:

"were inoculated with the 2019-nCoV/USA-WA1/2020 strain of SARS-CoV-29 via a multi-route mucosal or aerosol challenge."

So the disease was transmitted to these animals via contact on their mucosal membranes or via aerosol. And it looks like the researchers used the original (from Wuhan) strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Here is a direct link to that Nature Communications journal article: www.nature.com...

a reply to: Uphill -- a new (different) journal article finds human brain shrinkage following a COVID-19 infection. The cause of this brain shrinkage has not yet been found, they say:

www.nationalgeographic.co.uk...